Thanks for the great post Aayesha! As a frequent google maps user, I can’t imagine my life without it. I can barely remember back to the days of mapquest when we had to print directions off prior to going somewhere. Considering they have the entire US mapped I’m curious if they’ll continue to develop these areas in more detail or if they’ll focus primarily on markets outside the US. Do you think that there is significant value in the greater detail in the currently mapped areas? I’m trying to imagine myself looking at universities and vacation spots and could see it having some value.
Similar to those above, I believe that nuclear has to play a major part in energy production in order to help reduce the climate effects of hydrocarbon power sources. Having spent a decent amount of time in manufacturing facilities it’s crazy to see the differences in modern control rooms and those that haven’t been updated in 50 years. The plant I worked at had a very recently updated control room and the trending technology and predictive nature of the software to improve process efficiency and mitigate crisis scenarios is incredible. I hope (and fully expect) many of the nuclear facilities to update their control systems in the very near future.
I think Kickstarter is a great idea, and has clearly been successful so far. A couple of questions regarding their business model. What fundamentally differentiates the company. It seems like another company could easily come in and copy their model. I also think that they 5% fee on top of the 3-5% charged by the credit cards is a significant portion of the money contributed.
I’ve been familiar with kickstarter for a while, but didn’t know that they only allowed creative ideas. I think it’s feasible for them to expand that to other idea types and generate additional revenue.
Both Sam and Eduardo brought up great points. Microsoft is fortunate to be in such a strong position that they could afford to make a couple of bad bets, yet stay on it’s feet. It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which the Office Suite is not the dominant piece of software in the personal and professional computing world. The bet to switch to a subscription model really looks to be paying off. The fact that the user base has continued to grow significantly. Microsoft will have to continue to focus on long term growth over short term earnings to stay relevant in a frequently changing technology scene. It will be essential for them to ensure their smartphone integration works seamlessly and is the preferred choice of users.
Thanks BAH for the great post! As many have commented above, I’m curious to see what they do going forward to differentiate themselves. The money transfer apps that have become popular (venmo, google wallet, etc.) have made my life so much easier and am curious to see if they attempt to partner or create their own version. I find it particularly frustrating that money transfers to different banks are so difficult using the sponsored apps and would imagine they’ll try to improve on that in the future. Additionally many of the online only banks offer benefits such as reimbursement of atm fees, higher interest rates, and lower fees. I’m curious to see if Bank of America attempts to match or improve upon those features.
I think this post really brings out an interesting point that I haven’t seen in many of these blogs. Ultimately the consumers own a part of this whole process. By reducing the purchases from companies that are not actively reducing energy usage and promoting more sustainable business, the consumers can drive these companies to change their action. A major concern I have is that the breweries that signed the beer climate declaration are almost exclusively smaller breweries. In order to really make a difference companies like AB Inbev or MillerCoors will need to step up their game and begin to reduce their water consumption/energy usage.
I agree theoretically with Ali’s comment above, yet have a couple of concerns. Effectively what you are asking them to do is to reduce one of their most profitable businesses in the name of sustainability. From an outsiders perspective, I agree, the single biggest way to decrease the emissions from livestock (specifically cattle), is to reduce the herd. I just struggle with the idea that JBS will knowingly move away from a business that is a cash cow. I think they may want to consider a campaign (either individually or as an industry) to try to move the consumer demand from red meat to pork and chicken. JBS already operates in both of these industries and would likely be able to turn a fair portion of their cattle raising operations into white meat production. The overall demand for meat as the population rises is an issue that we’ll have to face in the near future. Though not beneficial for JBS, lab grown meat may be a suitable solution for the meat demand going into the future.
While I’m not surprised that shipping is a large contributor to emissions, I’m amazed to hear that it’s estimated they contribute to $330 billion in health costs each year. It sounds like Maersk is making significant efforts to use less fuel and explore alternative sources, I’m skeptical that the rest of the industry will follow suit prior to it being economically viable. It seems that without regulation as to the emissions and hydrocarbon dumping, smaller fleets will continue those practices until they become less profitable than the alternative. I feel for Maersk, as they are essentially the market leader in these sustainable trends and therefore putting themselves at a competitive disadvantage. I’d like to think they are gaining brand value as a sustainable shipper that can help them maintain their current clients and continue to try out these new technologies.
Grace – I enjoyed reading more about the effects of climate change on the luxury garment industry. Similar to what Lawrence and Erica were saying, the EP&L, while a good measure to raise awareness, doesn’t seem to address the issue at all. It’s unclear to me how they are currently using it other than to drive the issue to the forefront and influence the farmers to institute more favorable grazing practices. There is no mention of the company, or consumer for that matter, working to reduce production or purchases of the material, or try other materials that may be in higher supply. Ultimately, their business seems at odds with fixing this problem. I want to suggest that they re-image the company as very sustainable and try to drive customers to buy clothes made from materials that are in high supply, but I can’t imagine that will be successful with their current client base.
I think the product and application is a great idea. Personally, assuming the price of the hardware is reasonable, I would be excited to try a product that not only saves me money, but also helps to reduce energy usage in general. I do have a couple of concern with their product. The hardware, software, and connectivity issues seem to be a major issue. I can’t imagine many consumers being inclined to purchase the product if there’s a solid chance that it will stop working within a month. In that same line of thought, the connectivity issues are troubling. I doubt the average consumer would routinely check their devices and reconnect them, and without doing so the product would be ineffective at saving electricity and reducing costs. Overall I imagine this product could have great success, it sounds like they just need to work out some of the bugs first.